Posted
by
samzenpuson Thursday October 10, 2013 @07:54PM
from the take-another-look dept.

sciencehabit writes "One unintended effect of the U.S. federal shutdown is that helpful press officers at government labs are not available to provide a reality check to some of the wilder stories that can catch fire on the Internet. They would have come in handy this week, when a number of outlets jumped on a report on the BBC News website. The National Ignition Facility (NIF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, it reported, had passed a 'nuclear fusion milestone.' NIF uses the world's highest energy laser system to crush tiny pellets containing a form of hydrogen fuel to enormous temperature and pressure. The aim is to get the hydrogen nuclei to fuse together into helium atoms, releasing energy. The BBC story reported that during one experiment last month, 'the amount of energy released through the fusion reaction exceeded the amount of energy being absorbed by the fuel — the first time this had been achieved at any fusion facility in the world.' This prompted a rush of even more effusive headlines proclaiming the 'fusion breakthrough.' As no doubt NIF's press officers would have told reporters, the experiment in question certainly shows important progress, but it is not the breakthrough everyone is hoping for."

The amount of energy generated by fusion is quoted as having exceeded the amount of energy absorbed by the fusion fuel [my italics].

The misleading part comes from the fact that the target absorbs only a small fraction of the energy in the laser pulse. The August experiments used a laser pulse of 1.7 million joules to generate 8000 joules of fusion energy (measured from neutron yield). So the fusion energy amounts to a few percent of the energy in the laser pulse (and much less if you account for the inefficiency of the laser).

That was actually a serious concern before we started blowing up Pacific islands for practice. It was thought that the bomb could trigger a chain reaction that fused all of the Nitrogen in the atmosphere in one very brief but spectacular flash of high energy radiation. Contrary to what some have claimed the boffins on the Manhattan project did not just cross their fingers and light the fuse, they rigorously demonstrated that it could not happen long before they had a working bomb. It's actually quite an interesting historical story and well worth a browsing in WP (ie: I can't be bothered looking it up and posting the links for you;)

what happens if the laser turns out to be successful and all sorts of crazy fusion starts happening? would shit explode? sucks to live in berkeley (for many reasons)!

Facepalm.

Fusion is a massively unstable process, if the conditions are even the slightest, tiniest bit wrong then the whole thing instantly comes to a grinding halt producing no energy.

The sun only works because it's so massive that the gravity holds it together, unless we built an artificial star out of Jupiter there is absolutely no way to produce a run away fusion reaction. This is fusion's biggest advantage over fission if we can get it to work. When a fission plant breaks, it gets hotter and hotter unt

* Blazing the path to a carbon-free energy future (see Energy for the Future).

* Achieving breakthroughs in a wide variety of scientific disciplines, including astrophysics, materials science, the use of lasers in medicine, radioactive and hazardous waste treatment, particle physics, and X-ray and neutron science (see Understanding the Universe).

Isn't the energy released from a fusion reaction ALWAYS larger than the energy absorbed?

In the case of lightweight elements, the energy released by two fusing nuclei is less than the kinetic energy smashing them together, but only a small fraction of the nuclei in a pellet fuse, and most of the energy absorbed by the pellet goes into heating and ionizing the atoms that don't undergo fusion.

"This is a step short of the lab's stated goal of "ignition", where nuclear fusion generates as much energy as the lasers supply. This is because known "inefficiencies" in different parts of the system mean not all the energy supplied through the laser is delivered to the fuel."

The article made it CLEAR that the energy output was more than the energy absorbed. But it also made it CLEAR that it was not as much energy as was input to the whole system.

It's the articles that cited the BBC one and exaggerated the claims without including that disclaimer that're at fault. It's hard to see the NIF's press officers making any difference. If they'd ignored that part of the BBC article, they'd ignore that part of the press release and any protestations from NIF too.

Not really.

It's people thinking they know science and who can't read or won't bother to that blow things out of proportion.

This, pile of crap of an article, should be bashing the ignorance of 99% of people instead. The people that understood it wrong are in the same class of folks that need to be reminded that "contents may be hot" after microwaving food. If you are THAT stupid, one article isn't going to get you to catch up to what is actually being talked about.

Yeah, the thing seems horribly overhyped, and it still doesn't seem to be showing the kind of results already achieved with tokamaks, e.g. JET producing 5MW to 16MW fusion output power from 24MW input power for 5s. Why is the US so interested in the laser-pumped fusion approach used at NIF? UK gave up on it ages ago. There's got to be some motivation other than power generation technology. Is NIF more suitable for weapons research or something?

Yes, most of what the NIF does is actually weapons research. The fusion power stuff seems to be mainly a political ploy to get the Democrats to sign off on it - they're never going to get actual fusion power, meaning actually turning this power back into electricity, at NIF, and unless they know something big I don't, I doubt they ever will at any inertial confinement reactor. I only hope that they're able to do some solid fundamental research for fusion power using this.

IANAP and I don't really know what I'm talking about, but even mainstream news makes the point that it's about studying ignition, which is useful to both energy and weapons research. It'll be interesting to see how much use ITER get out of NIF's work.

Yeah, the thing seems horribly overhyped, and it still doesn't seem to be showing the kind of results already achieved with tokamaks, e.g. JET producing 5MW to 16MW fusion output power from 24MW input power for 5s. Why is the US so interested in the laser-pumped fusion approach used at NIF? UK gave up on it ages ago. There's got to be some motivation other than power generation technology. Is NIF more suitable for weapons research or something?

My guess is you're being very perceptive and this approach is about weaponization, not power production per se.

actually the BBC's story reports correctly -"The BBC understands that during an experiment in late September, the amount of energy released through the fusion reaction exceeded the amount of energy being absorbed by the fuel - the first time this had been achieved at any fusion facility in the world.

This is a step short of the lab's stated goal of "ignition", where nuclear fusion generates as much energy as the lasers supply. This is because known "inefficiencies" in different parts of the system mean not all the energy supplied through the laser is delivered to the fuel."

actually the BBC's story reports correctly -"The BBC understands that during an experiment in late September, the amount of energy released through the fusion reaction exceeded the amount of energy being absorbed by the fuel - the first time this had been achieved at any fusion facility in the world.

Science is wrong by definition, most of the "neckbeards" I've met understand that but are unlikely to express it as eloquently as Asimov [tufts.edu]. Skepticism is a fundamental skill for scientists and engineers alike, sensationalism is a fundamental skill for journalists and professional propagandists...err, I mean,...lobbyists. If you can't tell the difference then you really should hand in that vintage geek card you have on display.

I don't know if NIF is snakebit or just really good at putting out bad information, but this kind of distasteful and misleading marketing of science has been associated with them since their beginning. AAAS is being generous in assuming that their press department would have stepped in and clarified things.

The truth of the matter is that NIF is run by Lawrence Livermore National Security Corporation, a private group formed by defense contractors and academics. They're managed this way specifically to separate themselves from the government. There are plenty of people who are not on the government payroll, who are there working right now, who could have stepped in and corrected everyone's misconceptions. They chose not to.

It is primarily funded by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) and managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), a partnership of the University of California, Bechtel, Babcock & Wilcox, URS, and Battelle Memorial Institute in affiliation with the Texas A&M University System.

Either Wikipedia is wrong, or you are, and I think you know which way I'm leaning right now. What defense contractors are involved with LLNS?

As far as I can tell: URS is a general contractor with interests in energy production. Bechtel is a company with a focus on energy production, and specialization in nuclear power. B&W is specialized heavily into nuclear power. All are government contractors for very specialized tasks within their respective fields, all of which include nuclear power, and I don't see how that has any bearing on their interest in

They are both. Academic institutions often do work for various government agencies. And while it's a bit circular, the LLNL is one of the ways they're involved.

As far as I can tell: URS is a general contractor with interests in energy production. Bechtel is a company with a focus on energy production, and specialization in nuclear power. B&W is specialized heavily into nuclear power. All are government contractors for very specialized tasks within their respective fields, all of which include nuclear power, and I don't see how that has any bearing on their interest in LLNL.

Where are you going with that? I merely noted that there were a bunch of DoD contractors on that list.

Because the staff and management are contractors, not Fed employees, LLNL is not shut down. The Lab will begin shutting down next week (assuming the budget boondoggle continues), but until now has been fully staffed with the exception of a very small number of people directly employed by DOE.

I thought the government was shut down. If that is so, why is this government lab still operating? Is someone trying to convince the rest of us that sending a press "officer" home but keeping everyone else on the job is a "shutdown"? I suppose if the government can lie about whether or not it is operating, it can lie about achieving scientific breakthroughs.

Many (all?) of the labs are contracted by the the government through other organizations. For example SLAC where I work is administered by Stanford University under contract with the Department of Energy. We are not shut down yet, but presumably will be soon if the government shutdown continues. We are under various restrictions to only do critical work, so, for example, the SLAC Today publication that reports on our work is not operating.

at the national lab I worked at in the late 80s to mid 90s, there were 2500 people of which three I know of worked for the DOE. the rest worked under a consortium contractor or were contractors themselves.

Was that the original news post had a sensational title, but nowhere in the story, nor any of the links were ANY details about the numbers used in the experiment, specifically about exactly how much power was put in, and how much came out.

It is pretty basic stuff.

I either thought is must be BS or the value were unrealistic to be used in anything but in an experiment (so small as to make it impossible in real scale).

My worry is that these people don't really know what they're doing, and that they're going to ignite a fusion reaction that will be self-feeding and turn our planet into a sun.This is one area of research where a mistake can really ruin the environment.

Don't worry. All you need to do is unwrap the entire roll of aluminum foil and cover your whole body. You'll be safe then.

Don't worry. All you need to do is unwrap the entire roll of aluminum foil and cover your whole body. You'll be safe then.

First, nice snark. But, it's worth mentioning that tinfoil only blocks EMR and beta radiation. Nuclear fusion emits more than those; You'd be wrapping yourself up in tin foil only to find it has been used for its intended purpose.

This is where teamwork really pays off. All the GP has to do is enlist the assistance of a friend to make sure the foil is uniformly wrapped around every square centimeter of his body, triple check that it's tightly crimped to avoid any potential for air leaks, and wait a mere matter of minutes for whatever problems he may have been concerned about to vanish.

I'm worried that my campfire is going to burn down all the forests and destroy the atmosphere.

Pshah! What a silly thing to be worried about.

I'm worried that my five gallon plastic bucket will drain the oceans by bailing them out, and in the process drown all the land. And then people will fight over handfuls of the only remaining dirt in the world, and captains of the remaining supertankers will become warlords, and some people will evolve gills within a hundred years or so.

I can barely sleep at night due to this imminent threat. I would bury the bucket at Yucca Mountain, but I'm worried that it isn

Fusion doesn't work with chain reactions. You have to replicate and maintain temperatures and pressures thousands of times greater than that at the centre of the sun to get most of your reaction mass to fuse (there are actually far less fusion reactions in the sun as a proportion of its mass than most people seem to think). If you can't maintain these conditions, the fusion stops and the reactor shuts down. For inertial confinement fusion like the NIF one has to keep feeding hydrogen pellets and shooting th

Good thing we did all those nuclear weapons tests to prove that possibility wrong, considering the conditions those weapons produced were much more intense than anything used in controlled reactions. You can go back to worrying about the LHC (but no one worries about RHIC...).